Sites that I recently found

[Thomas_Lerman]

Generally speaking, I was mostly including the higher domain level. In many cases, links exist to at one level to all of the other levels and that is why not every URL is mentioned.

[hg4144]

It is really quite exciting as to the web sites the Church is developing.
I've tried to keep up with them on my website:

http://myldslinks.com/official_lds.html

If anybody has any suggestions or comments just let me know.

Howard --

[Thomas_Lerman]

http://www.ChurchHistoryLibrary.org/

[1968leocomeeatabite]

So I take it that from the discussion of this thread, that there are many official sites that represent the church. More than we can identify? Is there an official list? I have recently been a little overwhelmed by the number of sites that I have encountered, that may not necessarily be official sites, even one or two that at first everything looks like it is and from the images you assume that it is, but as you get into it you find that it is anti- ---.

So remind me again how we can know if it is an official site? Even the scholarly,sites that might be good, but not official, how is one to navigate this totally crazy world of information and keep away from the undesirable? How does one check the sources of this article? How does one know if the information on a site is credible?

[russellhltn]

So remind me again how we can know if it is an official site?

Here's the "techy" way:

First, identify the domain. That's the part before the first slash (if any). Cut off everything in front off the second period (counting from the right).

For example (the domain is highlighted in red):

This thread is: tech.lds.org/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&f=40&p=147010

The domain is lds.org - it's official (although in this case, the information comes primarily from members).



A spoofed example: lds.org.myspace.com

While it has 'lds.org' in the name, that's not the real domain.



If it's not a lds.org or byu.edu, then it we have to look it up at http://internic.com.

To use examples in this thread: www.ChurchHistoryLibrary.org

If we look it up, it belongs to Intellectual Reserve, Inc.; 50 East North Temple Street; Salt Lake City; UT - it's official. That's how the church registers it's property.



Example: myldslinks.com/official_lds.html

Internet doesn't have the information directly, it's registered by tucows. If we use the "whois" at tucows, we find it's registered to "Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0132403512" - a privacy firm that's hiding the real owner. Clearly not official.



Another example: lds.net

It's registered to the "More Good Foundation", 520 TIMPANOGOS PKWY, OREM, UT - not official.



Of course this leaves open the question of how to identify official sites in social media - such as the official lds Facebook page. For that, I'd say you'd have to got to an official web page and see if they tell you what the official social media contact is.

[1968leocomeeatabite]

Wow, thank you much Russell, This is pretty tech y for me, but I will study on this a little, and give it some time to sink in and will be that much better off. THANKS AGAIN.

[johnshaw]

mormon.org is the official online missionary site

[1968leocomeeatabite]

Of course this leaves open the question of how to identify official sites in social media - such as the official lds Facebook page. For that, I'd say you'd have to got to an official web page and see if they tell you what the official social media contact is.

I have noticed that can be tricky, sometimes not believable, and mostly frustrating.

Question:
1. If we find sites that are clearly posing to representing the church, but are degrading and defaming the church. What should we do?
2. If we would like an opinion about a site, would it be proper to post it here and ask if people think it a reliable source?
3. I have recently become aware of sites that discuss the church or serve us members in varying ways, including scholarly discussions. could we have a discussion as to how these sites are helpful and how they may cause challenges?

Would these kind of discussions on LDS.Tech be appropriate?

[sbradshaw]

Official Church sites (and official social media channels) always have the official Church logo in a prominent place. Part of the reason that even local units aren't allowed to use the Church logo is to make it easy to identify publications that are produced by Church departments. So, look for the Church logo at the top of the page. The logo is trademarked so if an anti-Mormon or other non-authorized site tries to use the Church logo they can be taken to court.

[1968leocomeeatabite]

Official Church sites (and official social media channels) always have the official Church logo in a prominent place. Part of the reason that even local units aren't allowed to use the Church logo is to make it easy to identify publications that are produced by Church departments. So, look for the Church logo at the top of the page. The logo is trademarked so if an anti-Mormon or other non-authorized site tries to use the Church logo they can be taken to court.

THANK YOU, so it we do find a situation of non-authorized do we have an obligation to report it? Or is the church very much aware of this and have steps to get it corrected? If we get involved are we making things worse?